Adobe shows ARM-ready Flash 10; Spansion names Apple in suit

Adobe has pledged to optimize a version of Flash 10 for smartphones using ARM processors like those of the iPhone -- but iPhone itself isn't getting that upgrade. Also, flash memory maker Spansion has implicated Apple in lawsuits against Samsung that could block the import of iPods.

Adobe shows Flash 10 on ARM smartphone chips

At the start of its Max conference for developers, Adobe on Monday demonstrated Flash 10 for ARM processors as well as a similarly mobile port of AIR, or its container for stand-alone Flash apps.

The technology is due in the second half of 2009 and will give smartphones and home electronics based on ARM11 series chips features closer to full desktop-level Flash through a mix of optimizations and the hardware graphics acceleration of newer devices.

But while the new code is cross-platform and would work on iPhone's ARM1176 processor, Adobe notably demonstrated on Google's Android, Microsoft's Windows Mobile, and Symbian -- not Apple's hardware.

According to Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch, the continued absence of Flash on the iPhone now has less to do with technical barriers and more with Apple's opinion of whether the animation software is worth the effort.

"This needs a little more baking. We need to pass the taste test of Apple's head chef," the official says, referring to the iPhone maker's Steve Jobs.

Apple's co-founder has been openly critical of Flash as it exists on mobile devices. While Flash Lite already exists for cellphones, it doesn't support the plugins user expect. Conversely, desktop-ready Flash is full-featured but, until now, too stressful for iPhones and most other smartphones to handle.

Spansion drags Apple into flash memory lawsuits

Flash storage manufacturer Spansion has filed lawsuits with the US International Trade Commission against Samsung to block shipments of the latter's memory chips.

Filed in a Delaware court, the complaints accuse Samsung of relying so heavily on US-based Spansion's patents that it not only legitimately references these often but has "built a worldwide business" worth $7 billion on several infringing patents used in flash for cameras, cellphones, portable media players, and virtually any other electronic device that uses the format for some kind of storage.

Among the alleged violations are for technology used to make floating memory gates, creating structures inside the memory, and writing multiple pieces of data to a single memory cell.

Although Apple isn't named as a specific target of the lawsuits, its use of Samsung memory for many of its devices is mentioned in one of the filings. This puts it in the same company as ASUS, Lenovo, Sony, and multiple other firms whose products will be touched by the lawsuit.

Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple has in the past used Samsung mostly for iPod memory but also relies on its solid-state drives in the optional storage for the current MacBook range.

Besides asking the ITC to block Samsung from further supposed patent violations, Spansion is seeking triple damages for "willful" infringement.

This is just a renaming of their existing Flash Lite product line to just 'Flash', as:
-Steve Jobs accurately described Flash Lite as a P.O.S., both in implementation and features, and now it's widely acknoledged as being such
-given that the full MacOS X version is so bloated, yet still runs as fast as a pig can swim, there is simply no way they could shoehorn that version onto the iPhone. Unless they are saying they've completely been botching the version for MacOS X...

And particularly on a mobile phone, the performance of any application or plugin, depends greatly on not only the CPU, but also the GPU and other supporting chipsets, system libraries, and how the various chipsets are configured and connected.

And I would rather poke my eye out with a needle than try to use most any Flash content on such a tiny screen. Right now, there will only be a couple of companies that redesign their content to make a custom iPhone-specific version (probably, Adobe will do the implementation for free for whoever is number 2 in using Flash after YouTube, as YouTube already works fine with the iPhone), and everybody else will either not do anything specific, or just whack their UI code to work with the touch interface, and not actually make it look/work properly as an iPhone application.

Apple requires approval only to release software. If Adobe's only problem was convincing an Apple that was at all willing, they'd be trying to convince users. And if Adobe wanted to convince users, it would have shown a demo.

So, we know from this that there's another problem. Technical is possible, but far more likely is that Apple won't let it ship and Adobe knows it. In which case, "This needs a little more baking" is lame corporate speak for "We know this is never going to be allowed, but we'll plead ignorance as long as we can get away with it."

If they have to trick people into installing it, by silently bundling it with other products that people use, it's pretty sad. It's one of the reason's that Adobe Reader 9 for Mac (which is just for READING pdf's), is now up from 110 Mb to 190 Mb in size.

This is just a renaming of their existing Flash Lite product line to just 'Flash', as:
-Steve Jobs accurately described Flash Lite as a P.O.S., both in implementation and features, and now it's widely acknoledged as being such
-given that the full MacOS X version is so bloated, yet still runs as fast as a pig can swim, there is simply no way they could shoehorn that version onto the iPhone. Unless they are saying they've completely been botching the version for MacOS X...

And particularly on a mobile phone, the performance of any application or plugin, depends greatly on not only the CPU, but also the GPU and other supporting chipsets, system libraries, and how the various chipsets are configured and connected.

And I would rather poke my eye out with a needle than try to use most any Flash content on such a tiny screen. Right now, there will only be a couple of companies that redesign their content to make a custom iPhone-specific version (probably, Adobe will do the implementation for free for whoever is number 2 in using Flash after YouTube, as YouTube already works fine with the iPhone), and everybody else will either not do anything specific, or just whack their UI code to work with the touch interface, and not actually make it look/work properly as an iPhone application.

...and while we're at it: we still remember how long it took you to port photoshop to OSX, after you guys bragged about how 'it was a quick recompile' in your first demo of it. TWO YEARS went by...

so bugger off and peddle your wares to the android crowd. we're done with flash on the mac and we don't want it on our phones. You have proven you don't care about us, so why should we care what you want us to do? nobody really NEEDS flash, and frankly we don't want it anymore...

call us once you fix it for OSX on the mac, maybe we'll have another look. i have a feeling it's going to be a cold day in hell...

This is exiciting! Thousands of Flash developers are waiting for Flash on the iPhone. Personally, I create Flash interfaces to control hardware using CS3's binary socket. C'mon Steve, let us have Flash on the iPhone!!

Well if it does ever make it on the iPhone (doubtful), hopefully there's a way to turn it off. I got tired of slow page loads on my Mac, so I removed it from Safari - much faster and not as crash prone now. If Adobe really was at all interested in getting Flash on the iPhone, then they should've started making the experience on the Mac better, rather than leaving it as is; a piece of crap. Honestly, what did they think Steve Jobs would say?

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.

I fully understand that Flash has become so popular because every web design company is looking to hire the proverbial web designer/graphic designer/software developer/audio engineer/video editor/how many professions can you cram in one person before they pop?

However, just because Flash makes it easy for the jack of all trades, master of none, but fits within a shoestring budget web developer to knock out a quick and dirty website/app doesn't necessarily make it the best technology to standardize on.

It's kind of equivalent to letting a group of handymen decide on universal standards for plumbing, electrical, HVAC, and structure. A group of handymen who have only ever used the first tools and materials they discovered because they were cheap and didn't have a steep learning curve. And who are unknowingly, through the use of tools and materials produced by a single company, helping to eliminate open standards and competitive tools/materials which might be better suited for specific areas.

If they are going to implement Flash for the iPhone, I suggest they start with the 'skip flash' feature.

I don't want Flash slowing down my page loads and burning up my download allowance when I browse from abroad.

I usually find that Flash navigation just stands between me and the content I want to read. Ever tried looking at a car on a car manufacturer's website? I always end up thinking: Just show me the bloody cars!

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

I wonder if Apple's real issue is with supporting a proprietary standard for content.

If Macs are going to be a premium brand that can live in a world of PCs and Linux distro's, then Apple want to support open standards for sharing content so they can't get sidelined by the next Microsoft.

Also, as Apple gain market share, and want to keep their neat Hardware/OSX/iLife bundle, open standards might help them define the market as all computers accessing common content, rather than Apple being a self-contained market in which it has a monopoly.

Therefore, No to Flash, and No No No to Silverlight.

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

I usually find that Flash navigation just stands between me and the content I want to read. Ever tried looking at a car on a car manufacturer's website? I always end up thinking: Just show me the bloody cars!

Agreed. It's crazy how much superfluous and poorly structured/unindexed content you have to go through on many Flash-based sites just to find real information sometimes.

I'm all for creative design, but make sure that people who are just interested in quickly finding details about your products have an easy path to it. Again, use the best tool for the job. Which isn't Flash when it comes to good indexing and search capabilities for a website.